Telangana High Court
WP/37741/2013 of Gudipati John Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A . SHANKAR NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.37741 of 2013 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri RSR, J.) 1 This Writ Petition is filed by the applicant in O.A.No.4209 of 2013 filed before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal,
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDYANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANAWRIT PETITION No.37741 of 2013
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
(Per Hon’ble Sri RSR, J.)
1 This Writ Petition is filed by the applicant inO.A.No.4209 of 2013 filed before the Andhra PradeshAdministrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, aggrieved by theorder, dated 15.07.2013 passed in the said O.A.
2 Petitioner retired from service on attaining the ageof superannuation on 28.02.2009. The grievance of thepetitioner is that his pensionery benefits are not beingreleased in spite of his repeated representations. TheTribunal, having considered the material placed on record,held that in view of the orders passed by the civil Courtattaching the amounts, petitioner is not entitled for releaseof such amounts, which are due to him.
3 In this Writ Petition, it is contended by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that though the petitionerapproached the civil Court and filed application, seekingvacation of such order, no final orders are passed.
4 If the amounts, which are due to the petitioner, areattached pursuant to the interim orders passed by the civilCourt, it is for the petitioner to pursue for vacation of suchorder. But, so long as the attachment orders are in force, the respondents, in contravention of such orders, cannotrelease the amounts, which are due to him. If anyamounts are to be exempted from attachment, it is for thepetitioner to plead before the civil Court for modification ofthe order. But in the light of the reasons recorded by theTribunal and as it is not in dispute that attachment ordersare in force, we do not find any illegality in the orderpassed by the Tribunal.
5 Accordingly, giving liberty to the petitioner to movethe civil Court with appropriate application and also toapproach the respondents for release of his pensionerybenefits, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as tocosts. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed.
_______________________
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.
Date: 27.12.2013Kvsn*
___________________________
A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J.